Okay, well that is all very well and good, but how is someone born outside the cast system...

Okay, well that is all very well and good, but how is someone born outside the cast system, and over a thousand years later, meant to know their dharma?

Attached: bg.jpg (300x470, 40K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/4lxg6ZSmZ2M
youtu.be/EB1f_nv5V-I
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

According to the Buddha, your true caste is not given to you by the family that brings you up, but by your inclinations. That is, your caste is defined by your true vocation/calling.

Didn't Buddha discount the gita? I am more interested in what the answer would be coming from someone who still accepts the text in question as valid.

Originally, your skill set and profession determined your caste. How caste turned into being hereditable by blood is anybody's guess.

> how is someone born outside the cast system, and over a thousand years later, meant to know their dharma?
It's almost as if you can't take nonsense ancient religions seriously

You're not. Hinduism is an ethno religion.

You can receive initiation from a legit guru still. But you'll be a fifth column hindu
youtu.be/4lxg6ZSmZ2M

AFAIK the Buddha agreed with the caste system, but added the twist in which he said that while castes should exist, they should not be defined to each individual by the families in which they were born, but rather by their vocational inclinations. There could be those born of merchant fathers that would actually be inclined towards warriorship, and depriving him of this inclination and making him become a merchant would be contrary to nature.

Or something like this.

Just because you are not born in India doesn't mean that you can't become a Hindu or study Hindu philosophy and religious literature. If you want to start somewhere the Gita is a good place to begin, don't read that edition though. The extent to which you learn about and understand Hindu dharma depends on how much effort you put into studying it
wrong

>How caste turned into being hereditable by blood is anybody's guess.
It's called kula dharma or familiar tradition. And it's in the shastras. In the first chapter of bhagavad gita, even. Here's a more detailed video about it. Varna is your caste and jati is your ocupation. They can be different but ideally they should be the same
youtu.be/EB1f_nv5V-I

From what I understand, the caste system was made into a rigid structure with Manu Smirti. When Krishna describes it, it is something you chose. Those with hearts of warriors go into the warrior caste, those with more spiritual predispositions become Brahmins. One's caste could change over the course of a lifetime as well. The Manu Smirti made Brahmins - the lords spiritual - the kings of the castes. I could be completely wrong though. But that's what I remember hearing

>is anybody's guess.

Hinduism was conceived as a way to oppress the lower classes. The writings are just the propaganda for the wagies. They didn't ACTUALLY believe any of it, it was just a tool to maintain power structures generationally. The Greeks and their ilk had similar beliefs etched into society/mysticism, they just evolved beyond it.

>Hinduism was conceived as a way to oppress the lower classes. The writings are just the propaganda for the wagies. They didn't ACTUALLY believe any of it, it was just a tool to maintain power structures

Attached: download (2).jpg (222x227, 12K)

Worst part is a lot of indians(tamils particularly, i dunno why) actually believe this british hogwash. They destroyed monarchy in india trough this bullshit and with Gandhi's aid, but they still kept their monarchy.

lol can we at some point dismiss the narrative of Gandhi single-handedly winning india its independence via bloodless appeals. Britain was a savage colonial power, then it nearly lost a very big war and couldn't afford to keep it's most expensive colony in check, and there was enough violence and civil unrest to allow figures like Ghandhi to come about in the first place. claims that suggest that he was some kind of political wizards I always felt fall into the trap of attaching the orientalist mysticism to Ghandhi's 'spirituality' in his methods or some other misconceived bullshit.

>Hinduism was conceived as a way to oppress the lower classes

you dont actually believe this do you?

"Bro how are we going to keep these starving people dying in the gutter? I don't want them dead yet, but I want them exactly where they are with no change. Also, how do we keep farmers farming? What is the simplest solution to keeping our social system intact?"

"Bro I go you, I'll just write the Vedas and the Upanishads, which will totally convince a bunch of illiterate skeletons to stay in the gutter. It might take a few hundred years to take effect, but dude, this is going to be RICH, they'll believe every word! Our power structure WILL be maintained Sanjeep, and we will live like Brahmins forever!"

"Sick idea Raj, get to work on those texts and I'll think of some names for some blue dudes lol"

"The starving are going to love this"

Attached: pranksters.png (394x589, 485K)

What was the point in Hamurabbai writing down his laws if only 10 people in the state could read them?

(also, spoiler alert for history class, the writings proceed the subject matter, they were an instrument used to enforce already made up belief)

Its less that they couldnt afford it and more that the old system of hyper protectionism broke down combined with it reaching a sufficient level of development. Hence why "loosing" India didnt cause a hick up in the UKs economic growth and why most colonies were ditched even when the UK could have dominated them militarily.

I do agree with you that Ghandi is dangerously overemphasized. For me its due to it being a far more convenient myth

because the written word is more durable than the spoken word and less susceptible to be modified according to the whims of the powerful?

And the wealthy widows of higher caste individuals, who were supposedly in on the grift, decided to follow the part where they have to self-immolate just for fun? Just to keep up appearances? They couldn't have decided to alter that part for their own benefit, since the rubes would never read it anyway? Your theory is flimsy.

I've noticed that there is a weird modern trend of projecting this cynical political and religious instrumentalism backwards through history. Like nobody could ever actually believe anything for its own sake, everything has to be a power grab at the end.

Also, if you don't see a difference between a fairly straightforward legal edict that could be instantly implemented with standard civil authority and a cryptic, sprawling spiritual system which is mostly self-enforced or culturally conditioned, I don't believe we have anything further to discuss.

buddha didn't give a fuck about samsaric hierarchies he saw them only as utilitarian
that being said he did say that there were people of a nobler kind who are naturally inclined to the dharma, people who develop and inclination on being told, people who do not develop inclination even on being told and people who consider this sort of curiosity completely bad.

this guy is incredibly secretarian and usually only talks about stuff from his own vaishnava prespective
even though there are many hindu traditions that also reject caste system

by reading it through poorly and scornfully translated free pdfs online through the world wide web how else bitch fuck yeah modernity

>chpt 6 verse 29
The caste system is just discrimination, power hierarchies and ignorance. Saddest thing to happen to the ancient religion. Its just institutionalised nepotism.

How many times am I gonna have to post this pic lit?

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 23K)

Dharma me this: if the indus were enlightened and stuff, why is their most prominent building (taj mahal) a mosque?

Unironically India's Buddhist phase made them easy prey to external expansionist powers, namely Islam. Having their ass handed to them so hard by Islam is partly the reason that Buddhism was dropped and the vedas had a renaissance.

he is an Advaitin not a Vaishnavite

I never said gandhi was a "political wizard". He was a shill for the british agenda and he wasn't well liked among indians. Part of his popularity comes from the fact he was killed

advaitins can be anything his birth allegiance is to vashinavas

how would that pic contradict a caste system?

Soul is transcendental to the gross body. Caste system is only for this bodily conception of life. Just talking about the pic though. Guy who posted sounds like a faggot

>Originally, your skill set and profession determined your caste. How caste turned into being hereditable by blood is anybody's guess

It's because most people learned their skill set from their parents. Back before television existed to prevent people from sharing their values with their children they would spend time with their kids teaching them what they knew.

Thus skills and knowledge and technique would be preserved generation to generation. Often there was no way to be more skilled in something other than what you could learn from your parents. You could literally sit learning blacksmithing from your father from before you could speak, how could that beat spending some time with a tailor after you were 12?

t. triggered pajeets

I see a caste system where the Upper classes represent the Supersoul's mind/eyes and the lower classes represent the Supersoul's hands/feet.

What now?

>Am I a true yogi?

yea I know but that wouldn't contradict the caste system.

I'm not even indian. But you are a onions cuck faggot

I've been called many things on this godforsaken shithole of a site, but I'll give you credit, this is the first time I've ever been called a Pajeet